Need more info about 3 cylinder engines

Ultradog MN

Well-known Member
Location
Twin Cities
So the early 4000 gassers were 192ci and the diesels were always 201s.
Why?
Did the gasser put out more hp/ci than a diesel did?
That would make some people chagrined. :)
When did they change the gassers to 201s?
Was it with the tin change?
Also,
I have read here that there was some difference between the lifters on a gas vs diesel.
I only know of the difference between the long pushrod engines with deep saddles in the lifters and the short push rod engines with shallow saddles. The difference in push rod lengths is at least an inch, maybe 1 1/4".
But I suspect it is an early / late thing and not gas vs diesel.
Later = deeper maybe.
Anybody know?
 
If you looked at the Neb test list of HP you will find most Gas engines in any model put out more HP then the diesel of the same model. I just looked to be sure in my list I printed out a decade ago.
 
I think 201 gas came with tin change 9/68.Along in that time frame also increased cid on 5000 from 233 to 256. Never paid any attension to pushrod length. So have no answer on that.
 
I noticed that too and it is puzzling with my diesel experience considerably better than my gassers. I'd like to see some old Nebraska test data where you could get things like the 65 Ford 3000 gasser and diesel for a comparison. Know where that might be? I checked the www and it's all new stuff and all that's diesel................hmmmmmm wonder why. Grin
 
Back years ago when I printed out this list I just did an internet search for the Neb test and found a site that listed most or the older tractors. Not sure if the link will work or not but at least I tried.
Neb test list
 
Even with the old 50's Fordsons, the gas engine was 200 cu in, the diesel 220 cu in.
Diesels need more cubic inches for the same power. In the Dexta, the gas was approx.
134 cu in, diesel 152 cu in. Diesels are more efficient and develop more torque because,
in simple terms, the cylinders operate at much higher pressures.
 
Think it was 4/68. Earlier than Sept., anyway. But yes, c.i. change happened along with the tin change. My '68 sales literature shows the late tin and talks about the h.p. increase for the 4000 and 5000. The early 4000's were only rated at 45 pto h.p.
Can't remember when the lifter change happened. It might say in the IT manual.
 
"Did the gasser put out more hp/ci than a diesel did?"

Yes. Back in the day, it was common (almost universal, the 172 CI Ford being the only exception of which I am aware) for diesel engines offered in the same model tractor as a gasoline engine to have more displacement to result in more nearly equal HP. Remember this was pre turbo let alone intercooler time frame. More likely, that not, Ford produced the 192 CI three cylinder gasoline engine (rather than 201 CI as the similar diesel engine) to maximize fuel economy. Fuel economy was was becoming a sales issue by the mid 1960s. The subsequent change over to the 201 CI gasoline engine was most likely a cost reduction change.

FWIW, the 172 CI four cylinder diesel engine is rated at about 6-7 HP less (PTO) than the concurrent 172 CI gasoline engine.

Dean
 
NE test 888, April 20 - 27, 1965: Ford 3000, 8 speed, 157.95 CID gasoline engine, 37.84 max PTO HP at 2100 RPM rated speed. 11.62 HP hours/gal.

NE test 881, March 29 - April 6, 1965: Ford 3000, 8 speed, 175 CI diesel engine, 39.2 Max PTO HP at 2000 RPM rated speed. 16.19 HP hours/gal.

Dean
 
Thousand Series "New Model Supplement"(dated 9/68) to the service manual says the engine changes for the 4000 came at about C204998 (Highland Park) with engine serial numbers beginning over at 000001. The 4000 engine serial number suffix changed from 'P' to 'D' at the changeover. Also a note: " For an interim period, previous model and new model tractors were being produced simultaneously, however, no previous model tractors were stamped with a date code after 8G19B."

Additionally, the supplement states the following serial numbers for other new model introductions;
2000 C204631
3000 C204849

5000 C204852

From my previous research on the 201, this is the point when blocks, cranks, rods, cams and lifters became common between gas and diesel engines of the same displacement.
 
More correctly, blocks were common across fuel types with common bores and cylinder counts, and crankshafts were common across fuel types with common cylinder counts and strokes.
 
Maybe that would explain why on my 4000 s.u. the instrurment decal say's 1600 rpm for 540 pto speed. VS my 4000 a.p. That say's 1800 rpm for 540 pto.Always thought they had the same engine. They are both mid 70's.Unless there is something else that I'am not aware of.
 
I'd bet your SU got a dash sticker meant for a 2/3000.AFAIK, all 3-cylinder 4000's had either the 8-speed or SOS, and attained 540 pto at 1800 engine rpm. The 4 and/or 6-speeds used in the 2/3000's has 540 pto speed at the lower engine speed.
 
Ok. There it is, to me anyway. Even though the gasser is about the same HP on fewer cubes, the diesel has the cubes to get the torque and has the efficiency to do the job efficiently running a bit slower in the process.

Don't know where the torque curves are, obviously to me the larger cubes could make the peak at a lower rpm and probably peaked higher, which means when you go to lugging you are backing UP the torque curve, not down to destruction.

Let's see: HP = (torque x rpm)/5252. Comparing and solving for torque [(5252xhp)/rpm]:

Gasser = (5252x37.84)/2100 = 94.6 ft-lbs.

Diesel = (5252x39.2)/2000 = 102.9 ft lbs an 8.8% gain in lugging ability on 11.9/16.19 = .74.....3/4 the fuel. Makes sense plus to me anyway, having had both over the years, the diesels were a lot less maintenance and I could buy diesel without the 40 cent per gallon road tax and the diesel is easier to store and less volatile.

One more tidbit. I bought farm diesel yesterday for $2.029/gal where road gas was $2.599. I bought my '65 3000 about 15 years ago for $3500 with new paint and good rubber, all amenities functioning. Should have bought it for less due to the low compression....unknown to me at the time, but still, I paid no penalty for going diesel with the purchase.
----------------

Thanks both you guys for updating me.
 
Gasoline engine change from the 192 to the 201 was at the same time as the sheet metal change, which was April 1, 1968

tractordata.com has the Nebraska test results for some of the old Fords, but not all.
 
Bingo, Mark.

The torque characteristic of diesel engines is (was, see below) better than that of gasoline engines for industrial applications, including farm tractors, and historically, operation has been more cost efective.

FWIW, modern gasoline engine technology such as direct injection (allowing considerably higher CR), VVT, etc., has lowered the margin significantly and will likely continue to do so. Myself, I predict the re-emergence of gasoline power in farm tractors in the lower HP ranges (100 HP and below?) due mostly to the continual meddling by the federales, e.g., Tier IV, DEF and other such nonsense.

Dean
 
We are already seeing it around here in HD PU trucks. What once was a diesel market is running a lot of gassers these days. Not the biggest, but I had a 2007 Ram Hemi with all the advertised hp and torque. It was tough. Did what I wanted and without the original cost penalty and gas being cheaper, it is happening.
 
BINGO again, Mark!

I predicted this a couple of years ago.

Federal meddling in the HD PU market, e.g., DEF, in conjunction with improved gasoline engine technology is destroying the diesel HD PU market.

Until the federales target the high HP gasoline engines once again becoming popular in HD PUs this trend will continue.

Not to worry, though, federales cannot resist meddling in anything successful. Though they have not yet noticed this trend, even cube dwelling federales that wouldn't know a camshaft from a carburetor will eventually recognize that gasoline powered engines are becoming popular in the HD PU market, making meddling irrestible.

Dean
 
Yeah, I have to agree to some extent, but remembering as a kid being behind any vehicle was just a stinking mess, especially Chevys and that went on with that brand until they got rid of the Quadrajet for one, and the heat riser manifold automatic choke....gasp-puke. I can knock it, had more Chevy's than anything else and currently driving one. It does have it's merits but they do/can be a nuisance.
 

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top